Bombay High Court
Putala Pandurang Jadhav vs Insurance Ombudsman And 2 Ors on 5 December, 2023
Author: A.S.Chandurkar
Bench: A.S.Chandurkar
2023:BHC-OS:14263-DB
TRUSHA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
TUSHAR
MOHITE ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Digitally signed by
TRUSHA TUSHAR
MOHITE
Date: 2023.12.06
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.11698 OF 2022
18:51:57 +0530
Putala Pandurang Jadhav
Age: 50 years, Occ.: Housewife
Residing at A-204, Rajvansh CHS,
Plot No.11, Sector-12, Khanda Colony,
New Panvel, Raigad - 410 206 ..... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Insurance Ombudsman
Having office at Jeevan Darshan Building
3rd Floor, C.T.S. Nos.195 to 198,
N.C.Kelkar Road, Narayan Peth,
Pune - 411 030
2. HDFC Life Insurance Company Ltd.
Having registered office at Lodha Excelus
13th floor, Apollo Mills Compound,
N.M.Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi,
Mumbai - 400 011
3. PNB Housing Finance Ltd.,
Having office at 1st Floor,
Pushmangal Complex (Building No.1)
Above Bank of Baroda,
Near Babubhai Petrol Pump,
Old Agra Road, Thane 400 601 ..... Respondents
Mr.Vikram Walawalkar a/w Mr.Arjun Kadam for the Petitioner
Mr.Ramesh Cheulkar for the Respondent no.1
Mr.Ashutosh Gole for the Respondent no.3
CORAM: A.S.CHANDURKAR &
FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
DATED : 05th DECEMBER 2023
Mohite 907 wpl11698-22.docx 1/3
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 29/02/2024 00:16:22 :::
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S.CHANDURKAR, J) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Insurance claim made by
her seeking indemnification consequent upon the demise of her husband
came to be rejected by Respondent no.2.
4. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner had approached the first Respondent
- Insurance Ombudsman making a complaint in that regard. The said
complaint is dated 5th February 2022. Since no steps were being taken to
adjudicate the said proceedings, this Writ Petition has been filed.
5. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that the
complaint made by the Petitioner was for an amount of Rs.47,25,000/-.
When the complaint was made to the Insurance Ombudsman, he had
jurisdiction to entertain the complaint to the extent of Rs.30,00,000/-. By
virtue of notification dated 9th November 2023 issued by the Ministry of
Finance, the pecuniary jurisdiction has now been enhanced to
Rs.50,00,000/-. Since, in the light of these events, the Respondent no.3,
Creditor has been taking steps to recover the amount due from the
Petitioner, the following order would serve the ends of justice:
a. Within a period of one week from today, the Petitioner is
permitted to file a fresh complaint with the Insurance Ombudsman
in the light of enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction pursuant to
Mohite 907 wpl11698-22.docx 2/3
notice dated 9th November 2023. In such case the complaint shall
be entertained on merits without going into the question of delay
condonation.
b. The Insurance Ombudsman, after receiving the fresh
complaint, shall within a period of four weeks thereafter consider
the same and decide it in accordance with law.
c. The learned Counsel for the Respondent no.3 on instructions
submits that a request would be made to the Tahsildar to grant
assistance to obtain possession of the mortgaged property but only
after the expiry of a period of 6 weeks.
d. Keeping all the points raised on merits open for adjudication,
Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
e. Rule accordingly. No costs.
(FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.) (A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)
Mohite 907 wpl11698-22.docx 3/3
